City Council - Regular Meeting

All right. Uh, being after six o'clock, I'll call the KS Bay City Council meeting to order. Would you all rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance, please? To the flag of the United States of America to the stands indivisible. Thank you everyone. Sorry for the lateness. Started the lateness. I see Greg Dro here. I think Greg, are you going to give us a update or something? Are you just coming to have a good time with us?

All right. Wow. All right. So, uh, I'll give Greg some time on the agenda. Uh, yeah. So, we'll do it. Uh, what we'll do, Greg, if it's all right with you, we have a presentation and then I'll call you up after that. Okay. So, it'll be after like 5A, we'll make you 5B or something like that. Make it work. All right. U So, we have public comments this evening. Um, and so the I'll read the criteria that goes along with that. Citizens wishing to address the city council during the time set for public comments are requested to sign the roster, which they did. Public comment period is intended for the public to share ideas and concerns, and it is not intended for any interactive discussion with the council. There may be opportunities for the public comments during specific agenda items that require a public hearing. Members of the public are requested to confine their remarks to questions or issues under discussion during this time. During any designated comment period of individuals shall not engage in personal attack, shall not impug the motives of any speaker shall at all times while in session conduct themselves in an appropriate manner. No person shall make personal impertinent slanderous or unauthorized remarks or become boisterous while addressing the council. It's sad that we have to do that. U I remember the day that this wasn't necessary but today it is. Okay. So on the agenda uh for public comments is Heidi Sauce. Now I just want to remind you that if you're in here for the public comment item like um consideration to reduce the on street parking or something then that would where I suggest you make your comment instead of up with the comment period now. So but you're more than welcome to come up and make a public comment about whatever else there may be. So Heidi, I don't know where you want to talk.

I just wanted to make sure I got a that you explain it when [clears throat] I found the agenda item.

Correct. And there'll be I mean there's a couple public hearings here. So if you want to talk more than once on those items, then that would be where you should do it. Okay. Uh Mike Powder. [clears throat] Happy new year everybody. Um well you all knew the uh the speed limit has been reduced on 101 um to 35 or less in some areas too. Um but I was going through that the uh ODOT have just released their summary of everything that went on and there were two people on the committee. The committee is made of four people and there were two on that were traffic engineers and both of the traffic engineers were the ones that one didn't want to vote the the lower speed and one abstain so it wouldn't be a locked jury. The other two that approved it one was a police chief and the other guy had a paramedic background. So it traffic engineers are designed or they optimized to speed traffic up to keep it going fast and furious and make the corners fast and do all this. They're not too interested in sometimes not too interested in cyclists or other road users. But anyway, I'm happy to say that was one and we're going to be working more I hope on making the road safe around here. Ocean Boulevard is still a zoo and there's a lot of work needed done on quite a few of these. So anyway, that's where I stand on that. The other thing was um tonight we've got the uh we're talking about um Empire boat launch. Uh, one day it'd be nice if there's a discussion on Empire Boat Launch, but it's a beautiful piece of land. I'm not sure it's used properly. You know, it costs a lot of money. Um, we maintain it. We're putting urban renewal money into fixing, you know, the something on there, too. That is not really what I'm thinking the urban renewal's for. You know, it might, you

know, probably needs doing, but it's nothing that's making the area any it's not benefiting the citizens at all. you know, urban the boat launch is nice, but it really only benefits Boers. And I don't know if anybody's ever done a survey to find out where everybody comes from that uses it. You know, they come far and wide. But anyway, that's the new year coming. So, lots of projects. Thank you.

[clears throat]

Thank you everyone again for uh for uh um your leadership on the uh on the uh uh the speed limit on 101. I just and and happy new year to everybody. Um I just can't thank you enough for for sticking that out. It was it was kind of painful to listen to the the ODOT. They're they're uh Anyway, I just wanted to thank everybody and since we've got their attention to to complete the safety corridor, um I noticed that the the Front Street community bike people are they're all over the world right now. But but the key to bringing people from the waterfront up to this town and up to Mingus Park and stuff is that half of of Market Street. It's the Market Street. Um uh uh uh just Mark it's crossing 101 north. That's the key is is and and people keep getting hit there cuz they're wait their turn for the horde coming down from Safeway to make a left turn but they don't realize it. People want to go and when when they make a left turn they there have been quite a few injuries there and so um since we have ODOT's uh attention it might be good and they're going to be working on 101 because we're having flooding and tide gate things and stuff like that. Um, and I'd like to give you Mr. That is the connectwalk.

This is when the bad come off. If you have any questions about what my dreams are, that just come off. Give me a call. And again, thank you so much. Uh and happy new year.

Thanks, Dean. All right, so uh we'll move on. Um next item is the consent calendar. Oh, first of all, I want to mention that we have besides the three of us here, we have Carmen Matthews, Councelor Matthews, uh Councelor Kribbons, and Councelor Stevens that are virtual with us this evening. and uh councelor Nebergall was is ill and was un able to participate either way. So anyway, with that being said, we'll continue on. So first next item is consent calendar and um in there was what uh Mike had referenced. We have a grant for the state marine board and how much was that for Nicole? You remember this?

Hold on a second. The project is um approximately $500,000 and it's a 75%. Yeah. So, it's quite a large grant and um I know that Mike had some concern about it, but we have a lot of uh individuals that participate with that vote, doc, and like it and I don't know uh if we didn't continue with it. Um anyway, it's been very popular and so far uh in this case, you know, we have the grants to move forward with it. So, anyway,

Mr. Mr. Mayor, I did want to ask a question on this one. I would imagine this will come before staff or excuse me, come before the council uh to review uh what it looks like and there's a lot of interest obviously in this boat dock much like our public parks and I just want to make sure uh this council understands what that looks like.

Yeah. So, this is a required element in order to just put an application in. We need to get your authorization to do the application process. We'll still follow the same things we do normally. we get a grant. If we get the when we get the award, uh we'll be back to you with acceptance of that. Uh with those dollars, then we'll have to contract out that work. That contracted work comes to you as well. So there'll be opportunities.

Yeah. So this $567,000 that was been brought up in the city's obligations 25%. And what Mike had mentioned earlier is using urban renewal funds. So the urban renewal funds will be m doing that part on the match. And so I'm a proponent of urban renewal. It can be used in multiple ways and this is just one that I think is positive. So, council, how would you like to proceed? I move we approve the consent calendar. Second. It's been moved and seconded to approve the consent calendar submitted. Are there any other comments? Hearing none, I'll call for the question. All in favor say I. I. I. I. I.

Any opposed? Hearing that passes. Next item on the agenda is a presentation for the east side housing feasibility presentation. who is handling that this evening? Uh well, I think we Jennifer starting us. Yeah. And then we have folks here to share and we I just apologize for those of you. We're going to look at that screen as we have one that's uh offline. Oh my god, we do. Okay. Right. Can you hear us? Okay. We sure can. All right. Great. And if I could share my screen, I've got a I can project these slides or or maybe somebody does that in the room for me.

You can share your screen now. Yep. Great. Just give me one second. Okay. How's that? We don't have We don't have Can you see that?

Yes, sure can.

Okay, great. Well, thanks everybody for making time for us tonight. My name is Zach Bells. on the land use planner with AKS Engineering and Forestry. And we just want to spend no more than 10 minutes uh providing a quick summary tonight of the the proposal and the approach that we outlined in um the East Side uh redevelopment feasibility study that we submitted to the city back in November. Um really the point for the presentation is tonight is to make sure that we're on the same page before we hit the ground running. We want to make sure that we're aligned on our project approach. So we're just going to take a few minutes to kind of walk through a summary of that approach. Um and then we'll open it up to any feedback and comments you have. We're not going to spend any time tonight going into site details or or project details. We'll do that at an upcoming meeting um in early February. We're going to have a a public openhouse where we'll get into some more of the details. Again, the focus tonight is really on just making sure that we're aligned on how we're going to approach approach this project. Uh before we jump into it, I'll just tell you a little bit about AKS. AKS is a locallyowned firm based in the Pacific Northwest, and we've been providing land development services to a a really wide range of both public and private sector clients for the last 30 years. We have a a a complete suite of land development services inhouse that um that really effectively enables us to provide these types of comprehensive and robust feasibility analyses for our clients. So Tyler and I along with and Tyler's joining me tonight, Tyler Roth along with some of your city staff and staff at the Port of Kuzbay will manage this project. um along with um another group of folks who are shown here and we've got really just given the nature of the

site and what um the city and port are looking at for the site. We have kind of a comprehensive team of folks on our project team as well. So we've got surveyors, transportation engineers, wetland scientists. We know there's wetlands on the site. We've got construction professionals that are going to help us understand um some of the construction complications and challenges associated um with with moving forward with the development on the property. Um we've got a geotechnical consultant on the team as well as an economist. [clears throat] Again, the purpose um is really to understand whether or not um the private market can support new residential development or other types of development on this site given the infrastructure and other improvement costs that will be necessary to move forward with a potential development here. So really this is this is kind of the meat of our approach and really what we'd like your feedback on. Um based on some of the information that we got from the city that the city prepared uh the city consulted with folks to prepare back in 1996 and 2000 and after that um we know that there are some constraints on the site and so we're hoping to take kind of an iterative approach where we um upfront identify geotechnical constraints and the costs associated with improving the ground conditions on the site in a way that would support redevelopment of the site. Um the goal there is that [clears throat] we can kind of quickly move to see if there's a real discrepancy between the cost to improve the land and kind of the market's ability to support development of that site. If it turns out that there is a really really big disparity between those two things, um we're going to suggest that the city potentially pivot to looking at other lower intensity uses like sports fields or parks or something

like that that would have less um less need for ground improvement, less need for infrastructure improvements and things like that. If it does turn out during that early analysis that it looks like development on the site is feasible, we'll continue to dig deeper into some of that preliminary design. we'll we'll look more closely at development costs and the market reality associated with two discrete scenarios. And so um again, if if it looks like the the um the difference between the cost to improve the site and the ability for the market to support development on the site is is relatively aligned. Um we can we can look at the first scenario which would be 500 new homes on the site. And that's essentially the concept that was put together um by the city in in a 1996 study called the east side development strategy or that was put together by the port in the city. Um [clears throat] that is closely aligned with the city's goal for 450 housing units on the site. Another scenario we're suggesting would be to look at kind of a lower impact option, maybe to limit development to only those portions of the site um where there are fewer geotechnical constraints and then again kind of correspondingly limit limit the disturbance on areas um that are more costly to develop. Um like I mentioned that approach is informed by a lot of the prior work that the port and the city have done on this site. Um the geotechnical conditions are are one of the big constraints that we see here. That 2000 report prepared by foundation engineers which um is on our team really um recommends that the site is unlikely to be suitable for new residential development just because of the uh predominance of sand and silt throughout the site. We also know that there's potentially some limitations in the city sanitary

sewer system in the area that that could potentially be costly. And then when considering the addition of this many new homes on the site, it's important that we also consider the need to improve the transportation network, not just in the immediate vicinity of the site, but also um in the in the larger vicinity as people, you know, will will need to use those kind of off-site intersections and roadways to get to and from their homes and to and from jobs in the area. So we'll look at those things in terms of their their overall cost impact as it relates to the kind of the ultimate feasibility to develop the site. So over the next couple of months we are going to be compiling and reviewing background data. We're going to be meeting with residents and other stakeholders. I mentioned before, we've got um kind of a preliminary u meeting with uh I guess we we have been tentatively discussing a February meeting with with the public to kind of introduce the project and get preliminary feedback. Um and then we're going to start working on the initial geotechnical and market studies. So that's all the stuff that's going to be coming up immediately. We are targeting to deliver this final feasibility report to the city by the end of April of this year, which is a pretty quick turnaround. Um, and in over that time, we've got three three public meetings um on the schedule and then one final meeting with the city council to present to you that final report. So, we've got this initial open house in February where we'll introduce the project. We have a second open house um probably in late February. We're going to share the results of our infrastructure analysis and then discuss alternatives with members of the public and other stakeholders. And then we are planning for a final open house sometime in March

where we'll share the draft findings of our report and then ask meeting participants and stakeholders to weigh in on their preferred alternatives and prioritize development options. All of that feedback um is going to inform the analysis and the report that we'll present to you in April sometime probably midappril um where we'll walk through the findings. We'll walk through the public comments and we'll present our recommendations and then at that meeting we'll ask um for you to provide your final feedback and recommendations on revisions for the report which will then be converted into that final document that we'll deliver to the city by the end of April. So, really quickly, that's the summary of of how we plan to approach this project. We think it's um given the given the budget and the timeline that was outlined um in the city's RFP, we think that's the approach that will give us clear actionable insights into what's really truly feasible for the property. And with that, uh we appreciate your time and look forward to any feedback that you care to share.

Thank you. All right. Thanks. So before we get started and ask some questions, uh for a little background on this back, I think it was 96 that was referenced, the Port of Kuz Bay came to the city of Cous Bay and asked us to change the zoning from industrial to residential. And that's what we did because they had a plan I think that's going to be looked at that the port has of how to move forward on this. Ever since then, this thing has just kind of stalled and sat there. And we have a housing problem. Uh, as we all know, uh, we have Greg Drobot and Daniel doing a 400 home development. We have a 30 H unit facility in Englewood that's being done. And this is another possibility. And so collaboration with the port. We got a grant for $100,000 to go ahead and do an analysis of this and to see determine whether it can happen or not and when it needs to move forward with it. I can tell you one of the things and the impediments that I can see we're going to need is infrastructure there. And again, I'm going to and we've loo talked to the port to go up with this and lobby for I think some dollars for infrastructure that I think we are due. I see other communities get it and I think we have a right to get it if they want to move forward and see the development that we have here and have it happen. Without housing, in my opinion, none of that can happen. So, uh we just also did this at Barry uh hospital. Uh Greg was involved as developer with the hospital at that time. We got a grant from uh DLCD to do an analysis and we have a project sitting there. Now, we also know that it's going to take $3.5 million in infrastructure to make that project work. Without that, it's not going to be cost-effective, but at least we have some plans in in hand to determine how do we need to move forward. So, I think it's great that we take this and u and move forward with it. So, with that, I'm going to stop. Counselors, any questions? I just wanted to commend we've got port leadership here and we have uh new commissioners here and um uh I just want to say thanks. This is

exactly what the city has wanted for a really long time which is collaboration and transparency for not only council but for the citizens that live in this community and I think this is a perfect example of that. Um so I'm really excited to see uh where we land. Um I'm going to challenge the consultants. Um, you said the report about the feasibility of that site was like in 2000. Is that right? So maybe something's changed in 25 years that might allow us to have housing there. So I'm going to challenge you there. Uh um I know a report is a report is a report, but I also think we've got new leadership and new perspective. So it might be nice to see what that looks like. Um and then you also said that you were going to have a series of public meetings. So my questions to the consultants are what does that look like? How are you going to be reaching out to the residents so they get to help be involved in what potentially this could look like recognizing that it is the port's property?

Yep. Great question. So, we've talked with the ports [clears throat] representative a little bit about that. We haven't fully fleshed out that our outreach plan at this point. We'll continue to work with staff on that, but we do plan to involve a diverse diverse stakeholder audience, including members of the tribe and other other folks. Um, as as you know, the city is as well adept at doing for projects like this. Um, the open houses will plan to be in person. I'm not sure if we have the ability to make those kind of hybrid types of meetings, but um it to the effect that that's um of interest to the city and that's something we can accommodate, we'll we'll absolutely do that. Um but one of the I guess one of the highlights I think that that stood out in our proposal was that we're really [clears throat] focusing on making sure that that public feedback informs the decisions going forward. And so um there will be an appendix in our report and and as as part of every memo that um moves us to the subsequent stage of work that outlines how that public input has um has helped to shape the recommendations from the project management team.

Thank you very much. Other comments, questions?

I don't really have any questions. Um, I I've looked at, you know, the the basic outline for the plan and and I want to say how exciting this is. I've been on the council since 2016. We've talked about this and I too want to echo how important it is to us that we have you from the court here in attendance tonight and and all the wonderful collaborations that we've had in the in your leadership. um since you've taken over. We really appreciate that. Um and I think um you know, communication has always been a a key component to me, making sure that our citizens are aware of what's happening and the impacts that that could have. And so I appreciate the um outline of making sure that we're communicating that. I mean, we won't reach everyone. Uh we think we think we can um and you use every avenue that you have to reach the public and and in the end when the decisions are being made uh somebody says I didn't even know about it but I appreciate that there's a good outline of what's going to take place um so that everyone's involved in in how we have make this h make this happen or figure out what to do um housing is an issue I just attended our presentation today. Um, and I think um, I'll say it again, if others outside of this area would look at what rural communities are doing to maintain resiliency, um, I think this I think we set a good example for other places in

the state. So, I appreciate this very much. Uh, Troy, Carmen, Sarah, comments, questions. I I will uh make a comment. Um, sorry, I'm trying to be and you may have mentioned it and I missed it, but and I believe in the presentation there's going to do a study of the bridge, right? Because that bridge capacity is sort of make or break, right? Yep. That's absolutely something we'll look at is is not just that bridge but like all the other intersections leading up to leading up to this area. Right. Thank you.

We had a chance at one time to get that bridge replaced. ODOT had it on there was going to build but I think the waterway became waterway and so the bridge did not continue to be We have Dean and Mike here though. So they got uh uh the the speed limit reduced uh on 101 so we can give them that project to to fix. All right. Are there any other comments? Anyone?

All right. Well, thank you for the presentation. I look forward to see how this shakes out and how we can work together on this and hopefully get it to happen. Also, one other comment. This is in a unique piece of property because it's in urban renewal. So, uh, that's another, uh, asset that can help this thing move forward and develop. And so, uh, I'm eager to see how it's going to happen. So, anyway, thank you. Uh, next, thank you all. Thank you so much. Look forward to seeing you down here, right? For sure. Yes, we will.

Uh, so, Greg, uh, this is the time I've allotted you to come up and give us an update on your project and so, thank you for coming. Good evening everyone. Happy new year. Uh thank you very much. I wanted to give a short update on Timber Cove. Uh we are now a little over a year since we broke ground at Timber Cove. And if you've seen recent pictures and uh had a chance to drive up there, you can drive up there by the way. Now, uh Lindy Lane is all improved in the first two streets of Timber Cove are improved. Uh we are very excited because within the next 30 days we hope to have our first uh phase plat recorded. Uh we're dotting our eyes and crossing our tees and getting all the details final. But uh having 30 homes available to be purchased and uh built is is pretty exciting. So we're hoping for February. Uh Daniel's already put his application in for permits and is Oliver Marcy to try to get that going. So

of course

we're we're there. Um, but uh I want to just give a couple updates of where we've come. Uh, over the last year, we've moved close to 100,000 cubic yards of dirt from the first phase to the second phase. Uh, including the purchase of the property. We're in close to $19 million in investment into this project. And, uh, that does not include the pump station. Uh, so that add that on top of that. Uh, pretty significant investment. and we're excited to finally begin to have some homes to to develop and and contribute to the to the pool in the area. So, uh we also have signed an agreement with Pacific Properties to be our uh uh agents to help sell that. So, I don't if you've seen the the sign that they've put on their their billboard out front. Uh but Randy and his team, they're doing a great job. So, we're very excited. We're taking reservations. We have quite a few. Uh, and we're also going to be building some speck homes as well right out of the gate. So, um, everything is still pretty much what we've planned. Uh, costs, we're trying to hold as much as we can. It's still going to be in the low 400,000 to to start. Uh, and hopefully Nicole, in the next 60 days, we have some Merurl grants possibly. Uh, so, you know, back to what we're talking about, infrastructure, that really is the dealer in all these projects. um for us to keep the price where we all want it to be, we have to build it at volume and that means building huge infrastructure. So, anything we can do to help with that, that's only going to increase housing. So, uh very exciting. Uh we've run into little hurdles across the the time, but nothing that I'm unfamiliar with. So, we just keep pushing forward and I want to thank the the city, everyone involved uh that's helped problem solving, you know, crossing bridges, all that. So, thank you very much. It's going going very well. We hope it's going to be a great year.

I think so. I'm glad that you taken this project on and uh I remember driving up there uh in mud and dirt and uh it was a great view. So, I'm anxious to go back and check it out again. So, but it's been a good relationship with you and like you said that pump station is something that we were able to participate with and help this project move forward. Without that infrastructure, this housing project probably wouldn't move wouldn't be here. So, thank you for taking it on. We appreciate it. Of course. All right. Thank you. Look forward to talking to you and seeing more updates, Greg. Absolutely. Thanks. Uh, next item on the agenda is a public hearing to consider enactment of ordinance amending chapter 2.35 of the Kuzbay Municipal Code. I have. Is that this piece here that I No, that's that's the next one. We We'll keep this one.

Don't worry about this one. No, this one. All right, we'll keep it simple. So, go ahead, Chelsea.

Yeah. So, this is um before you you have some text amendments to the provisions that current adopted code regulate our planning commission. Um the intent here is to ensure the city remains effective when making land use decisions. we are obligated um to make a final land use decision and resolve through the appeal process all um like determinations within a standard 120day timeline. And so we have a planning commission. They serve under our Oregon statewide planning goal one, which is citizen involvement to afford the citizens opportunities to weigh in on land use decisions. Um, but that's a it's a commission made of volunteers. And so if at any time we don't have a quorum in place to make a decision, that can set us back in time. And so that's detrimental for the city trying to make decisions within 120 days, detrimental for applicants, time and money. And so we are just making a few code amendments to help uh ensure that we can just keep the process smooth. So allowing a commission of up to seven instead of requiring it. Allowing the planning administrator to call special meetings if and when needed. Um making the planning administrator planning division responsible for enforcing the duties of planning commission rather than expecting the planning commission to do that themselves. Just some simple small changes but I think it'll make a difference in helping us um moving forward. All right. So, um, council comments before I open up the public hearing.

I just I wanted to make sure I understood the quorum. So, there are seven members uh on this commission and um if we cannot um and a quorum is a majority, but if we cannot get to four, then three will suffice. Um, and if we can't get to three, then it comes before council. Correct. Is is there any downside to that?

Um I think as long as you provide the opportunity for the public hearing, you can still even allow at planning commission an opportunity for comment. They just couldn't make a decision or recommendation. So you're still giving it's all about public input. So you're still offering that opportunity. And if you can't get the three members minimum to make the recommendation or decision, I don't see a downside to kicking it to the council because you're saving time rather than having to wait for another planning commission meeting. Hopefully, they have a forum. You know, maybe they don't. So, now you're two months out potentially having to go to council.

Yeah. I guess I guess my my the one comment I would make is is that um the citizens wanted to serve on this uh on this committee and so I feel like if they're wanting to serve, then they then they need to serve and they need to be there. And I see that we've updated the language uh to reflect that. So um I would give like a yes but like it's a soft yes because I really feel it's um I mean we all sit uh at this dis and we've sat here at least Stephanie and I since 2016 giving a lot of our time and we're appreciative of the volunteers but if they're going to if they're going to serve then they actually need to be at the meetings because we appreciate their perspective and my concern is if it's reduced to three then we're not getting uh um the full um the full expert expertise of of that that commission.

Just a follow-up question. Has this been an issue? Attendance has been an issue over the last year. Yeah. [clears throat] Do you feel that having the other aspects of this in there helps you deal with that where you can actually address the quorum issue? I do. I I feel like it gives us the room to move forward. Obviously, the intent is that we have a full commission and they're coming in their hearing and I think maybe this year we have new members, so hopefully it's not an issue, but if and when it is an issue, it doesn't we're not stuck.

Okay. I I understand that you're you're working under the the clock is ticking and you you have to and and for us when we're talking about efficiency um you know and streamlining and things that cost people money um we we want to be cognizant of that too but I too am concerned that we we really rely on those recommendations because they have that collaborative um experience in that realm. Uh I think the planning commission actually has a harder job sometimes than we do because of they have to be aware of all all the statutes that they are governed by, those decisions are governed by. So um so I too just want to state that concern right up front. Um but I think if you have the other components which allow you to address absenteeism or things like that that that can maybe be the warning for lack of a better word um instead of just a hammer.

Yes, that's um just to to point out currently planning commission is expected to police themsel and that's kind of a hard ask of volunteers to say you're not showing up we're going to kick you off. Moving forward we just we'd like to give that to the planning division so they can come to council and say hey it's an issue we need to appoint someone else. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other counselor's comments for Chelsea before we open the public hearing?

All right. Hearing none. Uh I think you've heard the criteria that we're going to be discussing. So I'll open the public hearing to consider enactment of ordinance amending the chapter 2.35 of the Kuz Bay Municipal Code. This will change the amount of planning commissioners and the way it works from it has to be seven members to it can be seven members. So, if you'd like to comment on this, come forth. Give us your name and uh the city you reside in and your comment, please. Any comments? Yes. Come on up. Christine Moffett, Live Empire, Kousbay. Um, I I have concerns about this reduction in public involvement and and I [clears throat] and I think that Chelsea is trying to deal with realities of doing things. So, I was just wondering, is there an option to have um a a member at large or some kind of way that you could increase uh the the participation that wouldn't be maybe a voting member, but they'd be informed or something like that. So, you would I I I don't know. I just feel like there might be another way out of this other than because we throw it to council then you guys haven't got the background and you're going to have, you know, how are you going to figure that out? So, I know it's really hard to get volunteers. I get worn out [laughter] and um but is there a a way to kind of increase the strength of that committee to where you'd have somebody that could pinch hit that wouldn't necessarily be an appointed but goes to the meetings that could sit in and I don't know I just I'm just wondering if there's another way and I you know I read this and I thought I get it and you know I I

hear this and so I'm just saying are is there a create another another creative solution to how to handle it. I don't know. Um but I applaud your reticence because three people deciding something you know is different from a seven person committee. Thank you. It is. Uh so is there any I mean I don't know how we would do that. The charter doesn't read. Uh, oh,

I was just going to maybe kind of speak a little bit more to what Chelsea's kind of tried to address. Like our goal is to have a fully seated planning commission and where we stand right now when those uh folks are appointed to those positions they hold a term and for that term they are charged with policing each other with attendance. And so for four years someone may or may not attend regularly but their partners in at the dis are not willing to police that. So what we're saying with this is we want seven and we're going to be a part of that now to help bring those folks who maybe just aren't doing their part. Let's open that back up so the community can put their name back in the hat and now become a new member. Otherwise, we're sitting four years waiting for that term to expire. so that other folks can get maybe access to that seat. So that's really that's really what we're trying to do is give a mechanism to help transition folks who maybe are not uh interested in serving to the level that requires on the planning commission.

And are we going to will they be held held to the standard I guess would be my next question. So if if they miss a certain number of meetings then there's going to be notification and is that coming from the city? Correct. Okay.

Yeah, that's our goal. uh because I think we've had several meetings that they're unable to take action and and it is a lot of work on our side and it's a lot of work on the applicant side and so we want to be able to help that work move forward and if I can just like um Miss Moffet mentioned reduction in uh public involvement that's not the case we would still have a public hearing we'd be here if you don't have the quum we still take the public comment. We still compile all of that and staff would still bring it to council. So, you're still having public involvement opportunity and staff is still providing planning commission, public council with all of the the input related to the land use decision. Um, so you're not removing any opportunities. Um, I just want to make that clear. But yes, the intent is that we have the full and this gives us the full seated membership and this gives us the opportunity to make kind of make those moves as we need to rather than waiting four year terms. I I just want to add too that that um we get re the council gets recommendations from the planning commission and there have been times where we we have had very very small pieces that have come to us and we've had you know 600 pages that have come to us um that we've that we've had to uh digest and And there there have been some modifications to those recommendations based on information that staff has gathered and uh communicated to the council. So I I think there is a mechanism as well even even if it was

reduced to the three members. You know, I I I know I said I I'm concerned about this, but at the same time, I also know that there is work that is done and there have been times in the past where we have um digested the information and made slight changes to that.

Any other public comments on this? All right. Hearing no other public comments, I'll close the public hearing to consider this enactment and ordinance amending the charter 2.35 of Kuz Bay Municipal Code. So council uh comments on this um you know I understand uh the concern about uh not having seven but the intent is to have seven and and this will give us the ability I hope to uh get that seven that we want. Uh but it won't also will not restrict um any development or process it needs to move forward.

I think that's great. Uh Mr. Mayor, I think in a year's time I would love for you to bring back how many times uh the vote was just uh three people so that this council can get a better idea of what that looks like. And maybe at that time we just take the first half of your recommendations that if you're not willing to um show up uh regularly then we would ask you not to serve and we go back to that to that four-person decision in a year. So let's see how this works, right? But we're going to be uh charged with making sure this comes before us and that there's going to be the the planning commission, right? If not, we have to take action to try to fill that spot or do something about

right. So, I mean, I think we'll find Yeah. I mean, we'll we'll know. Okay. I think and hopefully this council will move forward and uh start looking for people uh that might want to serve on the planning commission. All right. Uh Troy, Sarah, Carmen, comments. Uh no comments. All right.

I mean, that's a lie. I do have a comment. I I think that we do a really good job of trying to recruit volunteers and I think Chelsea is just dealing with the facts of us trying to get things through and we can dance around this all we want about how we need more people involved in that. But unless people are willing to be involved, there isn't anything we can do about it. So, we're going to have to come up with something so that we're not prevented from doing the business of the city. Uh because we wish we had more volunteers. So, unless people are actually willing to step up and do it, I I don't know what else we can do. We can want it, we can wish it, we could market it, but somebody actually has to step up and do it. I I guess I'm saying I'm fine with um our changes that they've come up with in order for us to keep things moving.

So, you know, and I don't want to diminish the the planning commission members that have served because they've done an outstanding job and you know, it's really a tedious job, uh very demanding and there's a lot of uh involvement in this and Chelsea can attest to it. So, I know what they go through and we're fortunate to have some uh commissioners that keep reapplying and serve and have the expertise and the knowledge. So, it's great to have. Okay. With that said, how do you move forward council? I move we enact the ordinance amending chapter 2, I'm sorry, 2.35 of the Cousay Municipal Code. I'll second.

Okay. Okay, it's been moved and seconded to uh considering the actment of the ordinance amending chapter 2.35 the Kuz Bay Municipal Code. Uh we take the roll call, please. Chelsea or who's chaping it? Chelsea, not Chelsea, excuse me, Christine. [laughter] An ordinance of the city of Kuz Bay, Oregon, amending a portion of ordinance number 507 codified as Kuz Bay Municipal Code Chapter 2.35 Planning Commission. Councelor Matthews, I Councelor Denovo. Hi, Mayor Benetti. Hi. Councelor Kilmer, I. Councelor Stevens, I and councelor Kven

I. Ordinance number 589 has been duly enacted. All right. Thanks, Christine. Uh, next item is a public hearing also to consider a type 4 land use application 187-25-0000138- PLNG for text amendments and code cleanup requires enactment of an ordinance. Nothing's easy when it comes to land use planning. But anyway, there we go. And Chelsea, you want It's all you, Mayor. All right. So, um, this Do you want to give it? Yeah.

So, I would appreciate if you would read through the script a little bit in some of that, uh, standard language just to cover our process.

Okay. So, there's a process I have we have to go through before we get into the detail and uh, the nuts and bolts of why this is even here. So, um, it is I'll I'll call the order this to order and the staff will make a presentation and a recommendation and then we will have public testimony. I will ask to hear from people who are speaking in favor of it and then I will ask people who are speaking in opposition of it. Uh, finally, if there's any that are neutral uh comments and questions on this um and about the proposal, neither for or nor against. City staff may then present additional material and recommendations based on the public testimony. uh after each presentation I may ask the question from the council for anyone wishing to speak who are signed up on the sheet and provided us um will be called to speak and state their name and address for the public record. Uh we ask each uh speaker to limit their time to three minutes. Uh please remember that all presentations will be timed. You will be informed uh when you are allotted time and expired and all speakers uh exceeding that time limit will be asked to to stop with their remarks. please to minimize repetitive testimony. Of course, if there's an organization, I'm not sure that's a group here, we'll ask one person to speak for that group um to uh expedite it. Each person may testify once unless they called back to the podium by a counselor or member to ask a question uh to clarify that. Uh so then I'll go ahead and ask if there's any uh conflicts of interest exparted contact by the city council. Um and uh each one will ask to be disclosed if they do or if they don't. and and then I'll ask the counselor for members to disclose that as I said for both types of conflicts personal or financial uh we'll ask them to expand make the comment for the record and then I will ask the audience as conflicts of interest expert carry contacts and biases related to that council member for whatever reason that may be um okay Chelsea you need to start

memorizing these pages for me I'm sorry

okay uh and so um the state law requires me to tell you that a number of things that at the beginning of the hearing. First that the applicable substantive criteria that applied to this application are contained in the notice of the public hearing and written staff report and will be identified to discuss an oral staff report or RS197-795 797 subsection 5 subsection A. Second, your testimony arguments and evidence must be directed towards the criteria or other criteria their comprehensive plan or development code that you believe applied to the application under RS197-7975-B. Third, failure to raise an issue accompanied by a statement of evidence sufficient to accord the decision uh afford the decision maker or other people an opportunity to res uh respond may preclude the appeal of a decision on this application based on this issue. RS 1977975C. A decision by the city council may be appealed to the land use board of appeals luba. Uh, and so now we will hear from the staff to move forward on a staff report by Chelsea. Did I cover everything?

Yes. Thank you.

Um, I'm going to share my screen. I'm going to be as brief as possible, but still um happy to answer questions. Okay. Um, so this is what I'm calling a development code cleanup. It is a proposal to amend Title 17 for consistency with state and federal laws and to align our code with current city plans, policies, and internal processes. So, these are the highlights. It's fairly substantial. I'll admit it's not a comprehensive overhaul. uh some of the the key points. We looked at the procedures chapter which talks about the different types of land use reviews that we have, what those processes are, what the requirements are for application, and we just streamlined those and really made them match what we're currently doing in practice. Uh definitions, we added some definitions for clarity. Uh child care, there's been some uh housing or not housing law, child care law that's been put into place related to how and where cities must allow sighting of child care. So, we've addressed that with these amendments. Um, residential infill of small commercial lots. The city completed a housing production strategy a couple years ago. One of the strategies was to allow um develop like residential development of small commercial vacant lots, undeveloped lots, so 15,000 square feet or less lots that wouldn't be likely to be developed for commercial use. Um so we've made an allowance in the code for that. Um simplified design standards in the commercial zone districts. For example, the waterfront heritage um zone district has some pretty stringent architectural

design standards. The commercial zone districts have uh similarly some design standards that are have been seen as barriers. And so we've removed or streamlined those to make it easier for development. Manufactured dwelling sighting standards. That's similar to child care. There's new law that says a city cannot require a single manufactured dwelling require anything of it that you wouldn't or don't require of a stick built. And so we've just made that clear in the code. Um our sign regulations, we've revised those to be content neutral. And so the regulations here are similar to what Northbend is doing. And so across both communities, the sign standards should be fairly similar and content neutral. The goal there is to not take away uh people's ability to play signs but to make it more more um broad more able within contentneutral um standards and then chain link fences that's been a big topic of discussion at least at the planning commission level um in our commercial zones or UR or urban renewal districts there are provisions prohibiting chain link fences. It's just been an issue because the chain link fence for the public is um more secure. It's a more cost-effective uh fence. And so planning commission, we talked about this. We had fence contractors come in and they settled on kind of a compromise where maybe we do allow the chain link fence where it's visible in the rightway in our urban renewal district, but it needs to be like a black vinyl coated chain link fence. Um, so those are some of the highlights of what is in the code. Mostly it's doing things like in the different zone districts, you might have like a special off streetet

parking standard in the chapter or a special landscaping chapter um standard in the chapter. And instead of having those all spread out throughout the code, we just took them and moved them to like the off- streetet parking chapter or the supplementary chapter. And so it's much easier to for staff and for the public to be able to find what applies to me. Um just a brief background. So the current code it's fairly inconsistent across chapters and that makes it difficult to implement for staff makes it difficult for public to use and um as mentioned it presents barriers to development. So over the course of last two years 2023 through 2025, planning commission has conducted workshops to consider the updates related to the housing defenses design standards and permitting processes. And so today we've kind of got to a point where we can stop and bring the amendments forward for adoption. it's really hard to just pick something and do an amendment and bring it forward without a trickle down effect within the code. So, we finally kind of got to a nice place. The goal here moving forward this year would be to take these code amendments and then moving into a we have a DLCD housing assistance grant that's going to look at housing focused amendments in the the code. We would then move forward and do some more very housing focused amendments. Um so just uh for purposes of the land use process, public notices required. There's a lot of notice required. Um we submitted the proper notice to department of land conservation and development. We posted and mailed proper notices on city hall on the newsletter to outside agencies. The notice was published in the world newspaper in

October. we we had to revise um reschedule public hearing. So, we even sent additional notice to people making sure they knew the public hearing was rescheduled. And on December 9th, planning commission conducted the initial public hearing. At that time, we didn't receive any um written or oral testimony. Um since then, I've had uh one citizen who's taken the time to review the code and ask questions. I really appreciate that. Um but of course tonight we have more opportunity for comment and questions. And so conclusion, planning commission did recommend council um approve as presented and that would require enactment of an ordinance. Um if council does after uh public hearing and deliberations want to make any modifications, you just want to make sure that you call those out in your motion. And I'm happy to answer any questions. uh how long you've been working on this

for the past two three years. Yeah.

Yeah. So going back again a little bit just for some clarification and a little bit of history. Back in 2015 I think wasn't there a brand new plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan land plan use planning and so uh I came and testified I wasn't serving on the council and uh I was uh pushed hard not to do that. They this one if you look at it you can see what's in the code and the track changes. that didn't happen. He just threw it out and drafted one and it was a mess. And we've been cleaning it up ever since that time. And so finally, I think, you know, Chelsea said, "Okay, two years ago, I'm not going to put words in her mouth, but we need to address this because it was causing multiple problems and pro issues within the city and the developers." And so, uh, I'm glad to see this. Uh, you know, at least we have something that I think is going to be more friendly. Those are my comments.

Yeah, I I um I agree with Mayor Benetti. I think that we did have a big change in 2015 and there were a lot of learnings from that. Uh and there was recognition that that didn't work as I think was originally intended. Uh and so um I'm always like, okay, if I'm coming to this meeting, what are they what are they trying to do? And in this instance, it really is a code cleanup uh to make things uh consistent uh to ensure that um the process to work with the city is easier. Uh and so I commend you, Chelsea, for all of the work uh to to help um to help us get to a place where uh really all we're trying to do is make sure that we're doing the good work, the right work, and we're being consistent and we're being transparent. And so I really appreciate your work on it.

Other comments before we open the public hearing or questions for Chelsea? Anyone?

All right. I'll see if I can follow the script now. All right. Uh where we at here. Thank you. Thanks. All right. We will now hear from any other per I need a lot of help on this. Person in support of the proposal. Each will have three minutes as we I mentioned earlier. When you come up, please state your name and address for the record. So, I will first start. Uh, will we hear from any person in opposition to this proposal? Each will have three minutes. I know there's a lot here. There's like 150 pages. Uh, I it was tasking for me to go through it and do it and but uh a lot of it I liked. But anyway, is there any opposition to this plan as submitted or proposed? None. All right. Uh so uh we will now hear Oh, I said opposition, didn't I? Okay. So now we will now hear from any person in support of the proposal. They have three minutes. No. All right. Any neutral uh one that wants to make a comment? Oh, you guys make Heidi, come on up, please. And just give your name and address for the record, please. Heidi Sauce, 155 East Market Street, and Chelsea has been wonderful to work with. Um, this took uh this is comprehensive stuff and and it took a lot of time um to try and go through it and ask Chelsea questions. Chelsea gave me answers to um all of them. the only one that I um I don't know whether it belongs in this part under um this agenda item or the last D agenda item, but Chelsea uh we were talking about it and it is referring to in the um code and I think it was

already in there but it reiterates it um the and it says it multiple times that um one of the goals is to um offer for um lots of pedestrian access to the waterfront. And this is specifically in Goosebay at the waterfront and they and there are maps kind of different maps that have been distributed of um overlooks and public access to the waterfronts on the we east side of the boardwalk that we're talking about putting in. And I have strong concern about the safety of that endeavor dur industrial points that are existing businesses where it is unsafe to encourage the public to come down to the waterfront. And I would specifically from the south end from Sauce all the way to basically the um museum uh where it is you know that that would make sense up there. But Chelsea's suggestion was that maybe and I um Chelsea it said you said maybe it could be revised to accept out industrial areas. Um so that's my you know my hope.

Okay, Chelsea.

Yeah. Thanks. Thanks, Heidi. Um, so she's right. The current code for the waterfront heritage zone district emphasizes that there's a need and a requirement to provide public access to the waterfront. And it even talks about like substantial. Um, so that was carried over in these amendments. It was moved to supplementary under pedestrian access 17.335.090. I know it's real small, but this is the the park. So down on sub4 developments along the waterfront shall provide pedestrian access to and along the waterfront. I think you could say accepting industrial though, you know, industrial uses or you could somehow if you wanted make it um an an exemption for industrial use on the waterfront that that's not the case. It doesn't um it doesn't resolve the the matter that Heidi like where you had public rideway adjacent your property and if the city were to vacate it, the owner adjacent would still be responsible to provide some kind of similar access somewhere else. That's a different issue. But just under the zoning ordinance, if council um would desire to, you could change that language to where it's not small development. You know, maybe acknowledging industrial development doesn't make as much sense.

So, I'm glad you hear Heidi. So, do you want me to stay up here? Pardon? Do you want me to stay up here? Yeah, if you want to. Sure. So, the question being is we have the city has rightaways and in this case, one of them uh you know Heidi had and Dale and so they were able to vacate that property. But these other rideaways that are um they are blocking access. Now, how how would that fall under this category?

Um, and maybe I'm confusing it. This category, current code says right away or not, if you're on the waterfront, you need to provide this boardwalk access. And that's been something that staff has not been enforcing because it's terribly difficult for a private property owner, developer to make that happen. Um, so that's very much separate from the right-of-way access issue. Uh so this is on private property. Um so it mean the code right now requires um the the industrial areas or even not non-industrial to provide a boardwalk to the waterfront. Is that correct?

Correct. And I can pull up that language what that looks like if you want just so everybody can see it. Um question. Oh, sorry. We're classifying in the wrong way. So, land the sub7 and 17.240.070 070 says land to accommodate the planned coups waterfront walkway alignment. Then talks about being in the TSP shall be provided through either existing rightway rightway that is created and dedicated to the city or easements dedicated through development approval and with a minimum width of 14 ft. So that's what developers are required to do today. staff hasn't been enforcing it just because it doesn't really work right there. Um, it's not in our TSP currently.

But it but it's a balance of providing if it doesn't work now, why why wouldn't we work on changing that?

Um, I guess it doesn't work because it's not currently in the TSP. So the way it's worded, there's nothing to fall back on. Um, so we don't have to I mean it's definitely a it's a it's a balancing act, right? We want industry. We also want to maintain our access to the waterfront. Um, you could you don't have to take that line. That was a you know, you don't have to adopt that. That was an attempt to make it less specific than not the 14. It could be this could be very flexible in how that access is provided to the waterfront. Um so there it makes it more makes it easier for staff and the applicant to work together. How do how do we get this access?

I have concerns. I appreciate your perspective Heidi. I I have concerns of us not allowing uh citizens to have access to the water. And I I um I think back to 2010 when I went to the Oregon Heritage Conference in Atoria and I asked those city planners to come and they actually met with the city of Northbend and the city of Kous Bay on how to uh uh show both cities what could be done because that is an industrial site. There is a port. There is a a cruise ship terminal. There's all the things. And yet there is complete access for the public to the water. And I think it's such a success story. and Front Street. That has always been my dream, right? Is to um safely uh but to make sure and my concern is is if we take it out um unintentionally, we will then not do exactly what I think this community wants is for people to have access to the water to understand the rich history that is down there. Sauce Brothers, all that history is so incredibly important and that's the vision. I know it's taking longer than we thought it would, right? But that's the vision for me is to have people down there to have the sense of place, to understand the history, and to have access to that beautiful, beautiful bay because there is there's nothing better. You know better than I do, Heidi. Right. It's glorious. Sorry, I'm passionate and I will wrap this up, but I think it would be a mistake to take that out of uh this plan. No, I think it's a working waterfront and it's an attraction that we've talked about uh through the planning down there. Uh we have our rideaways that uh have not been utilized for that access you're talking about, but what I'm concerned about is that we have a language that we have not been enforcing and you're telling us that we can enforce it. It would be difficult.

So, I guess that's my dilemma here. Yeah, because it because it refers to very specific like design in the TSP that's no longer in there. It's talking about planning for this very specific boardwalk of 14 ft width minimum. And so, so there was something very specific behind the text that was adopted, but without removing the intent is access to the water, whether that's through a glorious boardwalk or some other means that we can negotiate. Um, the goal with leading it in here is that you still maintain that ability to work together to maintain the access to the water. No, I I mean I think I understand what you're saying, but practicality is I think we have ability to that's why I think we've protected the rightways and I think that we need to find a way to make those available and there haven't been uh and I think that we need to have access to the waterfront and however we can. But what I'm like I'm concerned about is that we're not doing it and we haven't done it. So

So that's the cleanup. This is the code cleanup. Now, it makes it easier for us to do that and work with that in there. Correct. Work with the property owners, the developers to do it, but in a way that makes sense for both the city and Okay. So, it's a it's going to be something that's going to be palatable to both. Is what you're telling me? That's the intent, right? And that's how it leaves it open. It doesn't pigeon hole you into a very specific Okay. So uh theoretically we adopt this and then something happens on the development and we have someone that comes to the council and appeals this process or puts this in a situation. So how do we move forward with it in this language in this fashion?

So if somebody is not wanting to provide the access then I think we work through that they provide the justification. If it's something that rises to the level of council says okay yeah we agreed then we just make findings of why we've changed course. there there's a process to uh for a developer or whatever saying that this would be very difficult and the justification just can't be met whatever right yes yes we can make that happen for sure does that I don't know if that

I'm confused describe or define access to the waterfront if if somebody comes to our private property or Kun's private property or Kuspay tobo's private property or Kudson's private property and goes, I want to access to the waterfront. Do they get to walk across your property and go touch the water or is that walking on the boardwalk and visually seeing the waterfront? Thank you. That's the question. So, what this is is first and foremost, it's about development. So, new development. So, any of you existing

developments down there, you're not just going to be imposed. The public can just come on your property because this is in the code. Um the intent with access to the water it is to get access to the waterfront. I'm sure you know we can take we can talk about what does that mean and council can give some direction on is that touching the water is that seeing the water is that having I mean right now I would say it's access to the water right up to the shore to the water but well you I think you answered my question for the people that are there existing and the system that's been working for safety

um and liability um it uh it works new development you're talking about new development And I think that we also talked about for that rideway and the vacation that there wasn't any there, but there's going to be more. So, it was substituted and they did get even better. Right. So, those are my questions. Thank you. Thank you.

So, just just a another question for new development then. Uh some of those pieces of property are they're not large. So, how much uh I mean that could be deal breaker for development. So, uh, we could end up with properties and I know that there are probably people sitting at the dis that would have no problem if there was no development, but I think that the two need to coexist and work together. So, does this does this are we creating a process where we don't encourage any development down there?

Well, again, going back to and and could could private de development already in place be challenged much like we saw out near Lighthouse speech. Um, okay. I don't think that there would be with the existing development any challenges here because the the code doesn't say and it's not the intent that we go and take uh you know land to provide public access for an existing development. So it's the idea is when you're coming in with a new development, vacant land, you can make something work with your development and it doesn't have to be any large thing. And you know, it could if it small property and something small works, we we talk about that. We negotiate it. Um if it's a commercial waterfront restaurant, you know, maybe outside dining right on the waterfront is providing that public access, you know, I mean that's the kind of uh we want to leave it open and I think council can again you can say like this is what I think it is and this is what I think it isn't and that gives staff direction. Um, but the goal for staff is to leave it open so that we have more room to work with people and not be a barrier because you didn't provide 14 ft width of easement. You're not we're just can't we have to stop the discussion. You know, this is let's let's talk about what that looks like.

Okay. And I believe our whole sorry the only one comment I wanted to make counselor um Kilmer is that the whole point of the front street blue plan is to encourage development. So that is the entire point. That is why we want to do all this work. That is uh and so I just want to be clear that that's what we're trying at least I personally am trying to accomplish.

Okay. And then one more question. Um and and maybe the answer is in here. to read it better. But um I actually uh was working on a project years ago where um there was an existing building and so Heidi talked about several that are already existing and god forbid something should happen and maybe one of those buildings are destroyed and have to be rebuilt. Does that does that change in here how those existing grandfathered properties could be impacted uh and have to provide access if a significant portion of their property were destroyed and had to be rebuilt

um under this new

Yeah. So, I'm I've pulled up the nonconforming provisions under 173210. And generally, you can maintain your non-conformance. There is already um in the code something about if it were to be destroyed, which is what I think you're getting at. Um and this is to a cause to an extent exceeding 75% of the replacement cost. The structure may be restored to its previous condition and all non-conforming use rights maintained provided such restoration is commenced within a period of 24 months after the date of destruction. So it gives two years right two years time. Let's say a fire, the whole building burns down. You have two years to um come back and say, "I want to rebuild." And we're not going to make you have to do all the new things. You can just rebuild.

Thank you. All right. So, you know, just to um councelor Denovo's point is like Kuz Bay Village is a perfect example of water access, I guess, is what we're talking about. you work with the developer, made it uh accommodating. Uh existing ones is not going to happen. I guess if there's an industrial piece of property that they want to develop, they would have to find a way that would be safe in both aspects for them and the public, but that's going to be something that can be discussed and worked on. Right. Correct. Okay. Troy, Sarah, Carmen, any comments on This is Sarah. I have a comment about something different if we're ready to move on. Okay, that's it.

Okay. Um, I just want to say thank you to Chelsea who sat on in I think it was Chelsea, you'll have to remind me. Uh, 2024, the legislature put the legislative uh body put together a a House bill to direct the DLC to create a work group around regulatory barriers for child care. Uh Chelsea applied and was appointed to that committee and uh did some great work and there's a great I think 52page summary of all of the recommendations and we are out in front as a city by making these changes. Now I'm hearing different childcare advocacy groups working across the state to help uh work with cities to make these changes and they're coming up against quite a few barriers. So I want to commend you for that. Uh secondly, I do have concerns about the change to the fencing. You know, I think uh to inspire new development, there needs to be a level of beautifification in the city. And I'm I'm not sure that we obtain that with chain link fencing, even if it is block.

Okay, those are my comments. Thanks. All right. Thanks. All right. Anyone else on the council? I'm skipping around a little bit here, so I just want to make sure we clarify it before we move forward. All right. So, all written comments received to date are included in the record. Yes. All written comments received

I actually wanted to ask a question about the commercial lot portion. Um I know that we we have talked about it in the past where we are commercially zoned properties. We are res we are restricted. We don't have as much. Um I I know that that uh residential is important um but also commercial is as well. Uh by reducing are we reducing that by saying that we so so there's the opportunity for commercial development.

Yeah. Um so I think there's I'm not I'm not an expert but commercial development requires a certain amount of land to really make it pencil out to build. And these this 15,000 square foot is like a threshold where it's really too small for commercial development. And so that was back when we did our housing production strategies why that was kind of looked at like let's look at these smaller lots. Can we um make room for residential? And it's really it's residential is already allowed in commercial zone just not you know kind of um stand alone like that. So, I don't think it takes away from your ability for commercial development. And further, there's, you know, when you're talking about reszoning, like this isn't a reszone, but if it were, those those individual lots are smaller than two acres. And so, they don't really kind of qualify against your commercial land.

Okay. So, anything else? All right. So, now all written comments received to date included in the record. Am I right? Yes. Correct. Okay. There's no rebuttal from the staff. No. And we've already asked the council members have multiple questions at Chelsea. So, we're past that point. Uh, do councilors have any further questions before we close the public hearing?

I think we've exhausted that. So, we'll close the public hearing. Applicants should have the opportunity to answer any of these last questions as applicants has in the final word in the public hearing. Okay. Onward. Uh, I now close the public hearing and record the time. It's 7:26. Okay. City council's deliberation and discussion. Now it's time for the city council to deliberate. Um so the city council uh after having conducted the se second public hearing on this matter recommends approval. Um am I doing this correctly? I need approval on this. So, on your last page, mayor, all the way at the back, there's a motion, recommended motion.

Okay. Recommendation. Um, oh, excuse me. Recommendation below. I I need a motion for to recommend the city council to approve land use application 187-25-00138-NG. Based on the information presented by the applicant, all evidence, the applicant is the city. all evidence in the record to date and the recommended findings of approval as presented and to to enact the ordinance confirming those amendments authorized to the Ksb Development Code. I make a motion to approve the land use applicant 187-25-0000138- PLNG based on the information presented by the applicant, all evidence in the record to date and the recommended findings of approval as presented and enact an ordinance confirming those amendments authorized to the Kuspay Development Code.

Second. All right, we have a motion in a second. Christine, an ordinance amending the Kuzbay Municipal Cold Title 17 Kuzbay Development Code for consistency, clarity, and ease of use. Councelor Denovo, Mayor Benetti, hi. Councelor Kilmer, I councelor Stevens, hi. Councelor Kribbons I. Councelor Matthews I. Ordinance number 590 has been duly enacted.

Thank you. And Marcia, you've been so patient. And you're next public hearing to consider adoption of resolution 26-01 amending the state approved building codes permit fee schedule. Please come up and give us a brief uh description of where we're at and what's happening.

Okay. So, um, good evening. Uh, at the November 18th meeting, we presented an modification increase to our building permit fees schedule to submit to the state for review and approval. We were granted that by staff. We did submit to the state. They reviewed it. They have approved it. It went public for a 45day public notice. That period will expire on January 19th and if council approves we uh the staff are requesting adoption.

Okay, council any comments from Marcy before we open the public hearing? So why are these uh fees being adjusted? We had not adjusted them since uh 2017 I believe and so we are now in line with all our neighboring communities and hopefully to help adjust bring into a little better state our fundate fund for the building department. So is it correct if my understanding is correct that this has to be a self-funded operation? It is and that's what these fees do. Yes. And so there's no funding coming from the general fund to help offset this. Correct. Okay. So that's the intent. Is that done throughout the state that way? It is.

Okay. Yep. Anyone else? Okay. I'll move to adopt resolution public hearing. Oh, sorry. Okay. All right. Thanks, Marcy. You can go ahead and sit down. Um, so I'm going to open a public hearing uh on to consideration adoption of the resolution 2601 amending the state approved building codes permit fee schedule. Anyone like to come forth to make any public comments? You're saving it all all up for another item here. I can tell. All right, I will close the public hearing. And now, Lucinda. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will move to adopt resolution 26-02, amending the state approved building codes fee schedule. Second.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt resolution 26-01 amending the state approved building codes permit fee schedule. Is there any other comments? Hearing none, I'll call for the question. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Hearing none. It passes. Thank you. Next item. Consideration to reduce on street parking for the proposed Front Street multi-use trail project. I bet we get some comments. All right. Uh Jennifer.

Okay. Thank you. Um, the Front Street blueprint completed in June 2022 evaluated wayfinding, multimodal transportation, and safety improvements along the Front Street corridor between Market and Fur Avenue. During development of the blueprint, several business owners expressed concern regarding potential loss of on street parking. In response to those concerns, the city constructed a public parking lot between Cedar and 8 Avenue, adding 37 new parking stalls to support downtown businesses and visitors. The city has now entered into final design with David Evansson Associates for the northern portion of the Front Street um study limits from Cedar Street to Fur Avenue. During the blueprint phase, preliminary concepts anticipated approximately 30 on street parking stalls along the east side of Front Street. However, detailed engineering and safety analysis completed during the final design indicates that only 16 on street stalls can be safely accommodated. This reduction is necessary to provide a consistent 12- foot wide multi-use trail along the east side of the street that meets current safety and design standards. So, it is recognized that any reduction in on street parking has the potential to affect nearby businesses and property owners. To better understand these impacts, representative representatives from the parks commission's bike and pedestrian factf finding committee canvas the area and spoke directly with the affected business property owners. Feedback was generally positive and no significant concerns were raised regarding the proposed reduction of parking. Those representatives were councelor Matthews and um Comm Parks Commissioner Faraday and they are in the they are online tonight too if they wish to speak. Um in addition 21 letters were mailed to Front Street property owners notifying them of the proposed reduction in parking along the east side of Front Street and advising that the issue would be brought before city council for discussion tonight. So at the authoring this report, we did not receive any comments from that letter campaign, but on Monday

when it was received, I provided you with a copy. That property owner um is opposed to the reduction of any on street parking. Um they cited safety concerns and they basically they said consideration of the new needs and safety of the existing community on Front Street should take precedent to who might come to the street in the future via intermodal transportation options. Jennifer, can you put the exhibit off so the citizens can see that too? Sure. Can't. Um, Christine, it's the first attachment on the staff report.

So, while she's doing that, in conclusion, while the loss of parking is not ideal, the front street blueprint establishes a long-term vision that prioritizes safety and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Implementing that vision may require trade-offs, including reductions in on street parking. The anticipated long-term benefits might include increased pedestrian and bicycle activity, improved safety, enhanced connectivity between the downtown and the waterfront, increased business by visibility and foot traffic, and a more welcoming environment for residents and visitors. However, council may want to preserve the on street parking. If this is the decision, the project will still move forward, but there will be areas on this on the east side of Front Street where the width of the multi-use trails are reduced and bicycle traffic and potentially pedestrians may have to be directed to the west side of Front Street. Um, this can be explored more if necessary. So, we also have the project manager, Marine White, David Evansson Associates, in attendance, and she can answer any design questions. So, what staff is requesting is direction from council to approve or not um the reduction of 14 on street parking stalls to accommodate a proposed multi-use trail along North Front Street.

Okay. So, um how come we don't have this as a public hearing here to take comments? You can take Yeah. So, what we're going to do, I mean, you got a lot of people here that I know that's going to talk about this. So, I'm going to open this up for public comments. So um you know has it been mentioned by uh Jennifer that uh do we have any other presentation before I move forward on this Jennifer? That's it.

Yeah. So um there was a blue street blueprint front street plan and uh multi there myself, Lucinda, Heidi S was involved some others and we had multiple hearings and and comments. In fact Heidi set up meetings uh I I went uh to all of them. I think one by myself and then there's others that we got involved with uh David Evans also who was doing this and the intent behind this is this working waterfront development on Front Street and that's where we're at um to determine this and I know that there there's a shift in parking but I think that came up and I'm willing to listen to everyone about this and we can discuss it again obviously but the point was is that we did a parking lot that cost us I don't know how many millions of dollars to offset some of this parking. We're also because of Dale and Heidi, we came to an agreement. They gave up some of their property so we can have parallel parking there, which also is going to increase parking. So, there's a shift and a balance. Uh, and I agree that there's, you know, that parking is critical. Uh, and I have other counselors up here that might have a difference of opinion what we should do here. Uh the issue is in my opinion and I'm going to point to the port now that if we don't have the rail with the rail there it restricts us to what we can and can't do with parking and if we want sidewalks down there and we want this to be an attraction for tourists and like it is like let's say Newport there's there's part there's sidewalks on both sides and we're going to have uh bicycle paths and those are the type of things that we are looking for development. This of course is first phase. We're not doing all of Front Street. We can't afford to do that. But it was time that we move forward on something. And we started on the north end and we're going to move forth south. So I think this plan in my opinion is pretty representative of of what we want and it also accommodates everything. I

know there's some others that are not in favor of moving forward on this case, but you know, in Heidi's letter and testimony, it shows as she stated, Kuz Bay Village is a draw for tourists. It's happening whether we want it or not. And if we're not proactive in trying to put a plan together in my opinion, then it's just going to run a muck and it's going to be a problem. That's my feeling. So, I mean, I would love for the port and I will make I I it's my turn to come forth and come to your meeting, but I would love to see that part of the rail taken out because of the discussion I've heard. I know that there's some challenge to do that, but for us, if that was to happen, then these 14 parking places that we're talking about could shift back and they've accommodated that in the design. If that is able to happen, we can shift back and get those parking places. Am I correct?

So, that's where we're at. Um I, you know, I don't know. I I I'm going to also tell, you know, I'll ask the port when I come to the meeting to do this. Uh because when we do this front street section here, we also have to be concerned about how the rail and the paving needs to be taken care of and fixed. Right now, uh I think it's a a safety hazard. Uh and I would be surprised if anyone doesn't agree with that, but we need to do something. I know there's been some problems. Heidi's referenced bicycles getting flipped, some people having some problems with it. So, it's something we're gonna have to address when we do this section. And so, there's my two cents worth. Um, I have a question, Mayor Benetti. If if you plan to make a formal presentation to the port to see

No, I don't know about formal, but go ahead. Well, a presentation uh to the port.

Uhu. uh then I don't see a point in having much more conversation about this because until we get their answer um there's there's no decision to be made. So I feel like we need to hear from the port to see what they're doing for us to make an informed decision uh on this project because it is so important to uh to the businesses down there and to future access for citizens. The problem that I see with that is I think there's some um and they can come up and answer this. There's some hurdles they have to cross and it's going to take some time for this to happen. So the approach that has been taken so we can move forward on this development because we've been trying to do that is to do a design that can shift if necessary. Now, if we don't if the council decides that's not the case and we want to go another, I don't know, two or three years more to

Well, we could probably ask for a letter of intent that allows us to do this without having them to have the funds to pull the railroad if they want to do that and that would allow us to continue development because I agree with you, getting this done is really important. I'm just saying we're in a unique position right now. And if the port were interested in a letter of intent that said that they weren't going to be using this this access, we have the ability then to make the decision to move the development forward. Can we hear from someone from the port on the process that would be necessary to get this done and what kind of time frame we're looking at? If you decided to do this, let's say we set you up for this, I promise

if the commission was willing to do this, what kind of time frame are we looking at? and if you could come up and give us an idea, please. I appreciate you coming, too. Thank you. Thank you for having me. But you brought you brought second guessing. [laughter]

I know. No, I you know, I was just writing this all down so I could take it to the commission this month. Um, and so we will discuss it and what that process could look like. You know, we are talking about obviously with the swingspan bridge being out of service currently. um and potential projects of the railroad south of Kuz Bay. We're looking into exploring a rails to trails opportunity. Um we're not quite there yet. It's all still in an exploratory phase. So I would like to talk to the commission more about this and try to give you a better timeline. But currently obviously we're not moving

theoretically. I mean, we're looking at one section, and I understand that the you if you, if I understand correctly from discussions I've had, if you decommission the line, then there's a process you have to go through. I'm not asking for that. I'm just asking that, you know, the northbound part stay whatever it may be, and hopefully you can maybe accommodate whatever needs to be done for that development. But south, I don't see, this is me personally, and I'm biased, uh, I don't see a lot of development for that rail necessary to stay in that spot. So, we're at at a situation that we would need to have that rail fixed when we do this development that's going to be safe, which would be a cost to the port. I'm suggesting that if we're able to find a way to remove that rail, the city would probably, well, I'm speaking again for myself [laughter] that not all the rest. I would like to see the city take that action and remove the rail and fix the street and accommodate multiple things, parking and development. That's what I'd like to see. So, but if that all was to happen, how much I mean Sam you I'm not going to get an answer if I come to the port is what you're telling me.

Not without us further discussing it. Um, correct. So, there is a lot of planning with that and then we would have to take it to the surface transportation board and to remove the line. So, we are looking things that need to be done if that was going to be accomplished. Okay. It is a lengthy process. All right. And I apologize for it is a lengthy process. lengthy being like I don't know yet. That's why we're waiting to hear back from the surface transportation. So that's what we have for that. So I how do you want to proceed any for we need to take public comments?

This is just my comment. I I know that there are other counselors who might have comments on this. I I think it would be interested. uh the commission uh the newly appointed commission and this um executive director have uh been very responsive and have worked quickly and um I would hope that maybe this would be an opportunity. I understand it's all process but it would be nice to to know what that looked like but again there's other counselors that probably have comments on this.

Okay. So I'm going to open the public comments for this com this topic. Um, and I'm I know there's people here talking about that are probably opposed to taking the parking off and so this would be the time to come north forth and give us your name and business represent and your comment. Anyone? It doesn't matter for against it doesn't matter. Yes.

Sure. Okay, Mike Powder Cous Bay, I'm on a mend again from knee surgery and a hip break and all that good stuff, but I'm I got on my bike the other day and I can ride my bike again. Um I'm one person that like would like to ride my bike into Kuz Bay. I don't live far from it, but um when I go to Seattle, I can go from downtown Seattle to downtown Everett safely here. I can't go from Empire to downtown Kuz Bay without almost getting killed. Um but down at the waterfront is a is a great area. It really is. It's a people gathering place. The food trucks is a a good has a good vibe to it. Um the um Seven Devils has a good vibe to it and stuff like that. But down there at the you know, we we neglect we neglect everything except we seem to have a thing where we have to make so much parking for cars. You know, we want we want cars everywhere. Well, a lot of time we trip over them. But I'm disabled and I sometimes drive my Sprinter van and I go to the market. I do this sort of stuff and I have no trouble finding parking. It's a lot of people want to be able to park right next to what they want to eat. And sometimes they drive a 20 foot long truck and just one person in it and takes up all the space. So we have a parking problem and that's we just seem to think that we've got to have so much parking. Um, quite frankly, we we have a lot of parking. You know, if you if you look, I've never really seen to where people have had to park quite a distance away and take a cabin or something like that. We don't have the parking problems you get in big cities. Um, if we do do anything with the rail, it would be nice to make sure that other forms of transportation get a share of that. You know, ripping out the rail just to make more parking would be detrimental.

um you know, we have to consider other people's modes of transportation, but other than that, um on top of that, if we had a nice little tram that ran from North Bend to Cruise Bay, that would be nicer, too. Yeah. If you got the dollars to do it. No, don't quite have them yet. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments?

I was excited. Christine Moffett Goosebay. I I was excited to see this and I um applaud the effort and I think going at least with a part way is a is a sign of progress and moving on this rather than putting it off. Um, I think um I think it could take a while to get an official abandonment because it's just recently been part of the agenda with the closure of the swing bridge. So, I mean, I there's there's a lot of layers on this and a lot of emotions. So I think moving forward with this plan uh is a really good step to go on record supporting this with hopefully a a larger goal down the road.

Thanks Dean.

I would like to just uh back up what uh Mr. Powder said in in um in Monterey Bay, they moved the parking back a couple a couple blocks back from the waterfront and it changed the entire mood of the entire city. It is so fabulous. Uh there there are no cars right by the water at all. All the delivery trucks, everything are back a couple a couple blocks. And like the like the the plaza where the the the Starbucks is, you know, these sidewalks, they go nowhere and they're they're four feet off the ground. So, if we're going to do something, let's let's instead of doing it one chunk at a time, let's figure it out and do the whole thing and just make it really, you know, fabulous because it's a fabulous rip any.

All right, any other comments? Yes. Come on up. Uh Kobe Green, Gun Machine and Welding, 600 North Front Street. Um my concern at this point is I see you guys doing a section of the the project that has not much congestion and you're losing this many places. So, how many more pots spots will we lose when we get down to Coots as far as where it's a lot more congested?

Well, you know, I think we we you were at the meeting when I was there. We discussed this and the thing is is that uh I don't know what those ramifications would be further down. I think that's where we're taking this in sections. And I can be truthful with you. I mean, we accommodated, in my opinion, offset the parking with the parking lot and the parallel parking we're doing

down the street. It was going to determine, you know, a different situation, different criteria. And one of the things that I mentioned multiple times when we all met is that keeping the businesses there is critical because it's a working waterfront and it's what draws the people. That's what it's about. And we don't want to change that dynamic and that draw. I think it's great that you're down there working. I'm gl great that we have a tugboat. Great that we have S brothers. I'm sorry the Canudson's not there. But the thing is that's what is the attraction and we don't want to change that. And so if we did something that was a detrimental to one of the businesses down there because of the parking, I think it would be a problem. But I also mentioned when the the auto body shop was there, if we needed to then again this is my perception. I'm only one out of seven and the staff might have totally different ideas. But if we even had to think about permit parking so those businesses had parking for themselves are there things that we need to consider. We need to think outside the box what's going to be a benefit for everyone. That's my take. Now I can't I don't know I might not even be sitting here when you guys down there to that part of the development. But I think if we set the tone and it's squared away and we have things moving forward and I agree with councelor dovo probably I'm pushing for this now to make a decision and we probably should go and make a presentation in the port and kind of get a suggestion of where they're going. But it's critical I think that we have sidewalks on both sides. Uh and you know I mean I walk there all the time.

You walk more than all of more than anybody else. Okay. And so it's I take offense to that. I walk. So, it's dangerous down there without sidewalks on both sides. I guess I could, you know, and I'm always zigzagging back and forth. And so, if we want this to be something that's an attraction and ties into Kuz Bay Village and eventually to the boardwalk, we have to take, I believe, these type of steps and development. That's all. And just a little off topic, but connected. Um, if we are going to build sidewalks all the way down, right? Could we maybe fix the drains that go under said sidewalks before the sidewalks go in, Jennifer? I think you're accurate. Correct. Yeah, we are looking into that. That would be great.

Yeah. Thank you. No, and you know, and I I mean, and I you know, I applaud you guys working down there and you know, you've you've been the heartbeat of that area and we don't want to change that really. And so, um, you know, call me up. I'll come down. We'll talk about it. I'll drag some counselors with me or we can meet here. So, however you want to do it. Okay. Thank you. All right.

Mayor Benetti, I still think and I now since you said you were pushing, I'm going to push back. I think that we owe it to the businesses down there to at least have a meeting with the port. We have a port commissioner here. We have the executive director here. I imagine we could at least have that conversation in the next few weeks to start the conversation. It could come back to this council maybe next month to get an update to allow us again to try to make a better informed decision. Would I love in my movie for you to say yes, you can have it right. Uh I don't know if that's going to be the case, but I think it might get us a little bit further down the road for us to make a better decision for this council. I agreed with you. No pun intended. Yes,

I agreed with you. So I if you I not always. So if the council doesn't have a problem, I think that um we should probably meet with the port and see what the situation is. Uh doesn't mean that we won't adopt this, but if if things can change, then there might be a different direction that we go in. Counselors, pardon, this is Troy.

Yes. Um, I think that the executive director of the port already mentioned that, you know, whether they're considering it or not, it's going to be a lengthy process. I think we've already done all the planning, the research. I'd like to see us move forward with this. There's going to be an expense. I think Troy, this is there'd be an expense if we had to re-evaluate this down the road. Um, and so I mean if we can kind of get an idea of where we're at, I think that we could have build this out in a fashion that could beat the time frame. That's my take. I I think we're looking at years for them to be able to do anything. Even if they decided tomorrow that's what they want.

I think we have a commissioner here, Troy, who wanted to make a comment from the commission or excuse me, from the port who's raising her hand. Okay. Yes. I just said might as well raise.

Hi, Mayor Benetti and counselors. My name is Elise Hamner and I'm on the Port of Cousay Commission. I'm one of five commissioners. I want to say that thank you for all the work you've been doing with Lenel um our CEO. You've done we have a great relationship with Kuspay and I'm really really pleased with how things have been going. I believe when this whole concept event it ultimately came out gosh back in 2010 whenever u Mr. Lundy brought you that map. I think the port was part of that whole discussion and and we've been here working with you off and on since then. Um, thank you so much for listening to Kobe from Coots Machine. I know we have Kuspay toeboats here. Um, from a port commission standpoint, we'd love you to connect more with those businesses as much as you can. They are vital. They also have a lot of traffic that does go in and out and and there is, you know, more discussion maybe to have there. as to the rail. Um we have the port commission has asked staff to first take a look at the railroad bridge, give us a report, which they did, and then to move forward and do an analysis of what it takes to um deal with a railroad from Northbend to Coke. So yes, it will take time. You mentioned, I think, early on, that you could potentially do a plan that would look at maybe some options if you phased it in. I mean, I would encourage you to do that. It might take us a year to decide what to do on the rail. Um, but please give us that time to resolve that. Um, it is an issue to be in the street. If we're not going to use the rail anymore, then yes, I mean, maybe it should be moved, but we need to go through a process with our constituents also and have people be able to weigh in and have that conversation. I'd love to do maybe a joint meeting with our commission and the Kuspay City Council and and hear the public's thoughts on the rail piece once we know what we're required to do to either decommission it or you know take

the easement and and use it for a different use. So to your I think it was mentioned and I we have a design for both. So we can start with this and then phase it in later on if the rail was to leave. But in the meantime, I guess I'm going to propose to you that that rail and that street needs to be repaired. So I think that that needs to be part of the conversation that we have and I just want you to realize there's a cost associated with that and I you guys would probably have a better your the rail would probably have a better idea what that cost would be because the way it is right now it's not safe. So

well I can't comment on that piece. Are you saying that [laughter] that's a discussion that needs to be in in this? This needs to be part of the discussion. We would love to have you come to a port commission meeting and do a presentation on the whole project. I think it would be awesome. All right. We'll be there. Yeah. Thank you. Right. Oh, and one other thing, Elise, I've talked to all the businesses down there multiple times. I know. I I hear that you walk by. They see you all the time. Thank you. Yes, Carmen. I know.

All right. Well, um, as someone who walked around downtown or down in this, uh, focused area and talked with all the business owners that I I could, uh, you know, at least get in front of, um, I do want to mention that overwhelmingly it was received with, uh, a positive response um, from those people that I spoke with. uh increasing foot traffic, pedestrian traffic, just beautifification of this entire area is welcomed in a large way. Uh I understand that the initial drawing had more parking than the design currently has at the moment. Uh or at least [clears throat] the proposed design. And uh you know when we were reviewing this um from the parks commission uh standpoint, it didn't make much sense to have pedestrians going across the street and going zigzagging back and forth for a very small portion of Front Street when we could just make it a you know a pretty good uh access point on one side on the east side. uh and just make it a nice thorough fair in general. Uh that being, you know, said, there's lots of change that could come down the line and I think all of this is uh open for amendment in the future. You know, uh this is a fairly basic design. Uh with or without the rail, uh we're still going to be moving people and cars throughout this this area. we're still going to be having businesses operate and having um you know ingress egress issues that we're going to need to address. I think this plan does a really good job um of addressing those concerns while also uh getting us to the point

where we're working on that towards that goal of getting the public closer to the to the bay and having a more bay ccentric downtown. Uh, you know, I do a lot of traveling up and down the coast and around the world really, and the best commun coastal communities have a a robust uh public interface with waterways and that is something that I think Kousbay has lacked severely, especially since uh, you know, it's it's right out in front of us, but uh, it's just not super accessible. This really does help to increase that accessibility even without putting people on private property which I don't believe we should be doing. This is a you know a public right of way that allows people to view the bay and then has access points that are within the public um sphere. This is uh a lot of work's gone into this. This is that 100% hoping we're hoping for that 100% design in this particular section. um with the reduction of you know less than 20 I can't remember how many it was uh parking spaces but the addition of 37 offsite I have yet to see that parking lot full so I don't believe we're reaching a capacity uh issue um at this moment there is a more focused and organized parking structure on the east side of uh Front Street down by um the uh Sauce Brothers piece of uh property which is on the north end of Front Street. Uh instead of there's this no man's land, people park in every which way they want to. I think that this will really clean things up, make things much more streamlined. I'm happy to answer any other questions. I've looked at this plan a lot. I also want to say that uh

staff, specifically Jennifer, has worked tirelessly to help me to understand that and to help the parks commission understand this whole plan. And um I feel very comfortable with the work that uh staff has done and the parks commission and uh you know, we're we're trying to get out there in front of things and and hope that this would make sense. I think that this will feel much better than it currently does even with the lack of the perceived uh or the loss of the perceived parking that uh is exhibited in this uh in this uh design. But uh it's really looking good and I'm I'm really proud of this and I think we should move forward.

All right, Stephanie.

Um I guess I Guess I would just like to offer a different perspective. I was recently at an event at 999 Front Street and I could not find parking and that was in the winter. I uh I am concerned about losing 14 spaces and that's with the addition of the new parking lot. I'm not happens all the time, but I can imagine with the improvements that will be made to Front Street that you will see much more activity and the the the loss of those 14 spaces is going to be felt more more so throughout the year. Um, like I said, I was at an event um and I I could not find parking. Um, I ended up parking in a private lot. Um,

can can I ask a question? Yeah. Was there was there open spaces in the new parking lot? Uh, I was more down by the 999 um, and it was pouring rain, so I did not uh go farther south. All right. Well, just for clarification, then the new parking lot is a half of a block away from the 999 building. So, I mean, it's it's within walking distance. It's probably full then because uh everyone I I was almost at the history museum. Okay. So, um

Okay, so let me just make a suggestion. Look, first Hi, Heidi. Come on up. So, Mayor, are we still in public comment or are we moving forward? I never heard you close it. Close comments. Okay. Thank you.

This will be quick. I appreciate your observation about um not having parking and um the reason and I appreciate the gentleman that said he he you know he's there was plenty of parking and there is plenty of parking right now but I can assure you that I'm working pretty hard at having 737 Front Street which was an enterprise um be an enterprise you know a daily enterprise again and that is going to that's a restaurant hopefully and I hope to generate um foot traffic or foot foot traffic and parking there and I also um Josie's art lab is we are vacant we've got vacancies when those vacancies fill up they're going to be the owners there's going to be their customers and clients and hopefully we have events and purposes to come to Front Street because like Linda said we have the same vision I guarantee you we have the same vision um to make it vi vibrant and active and crowded. Um and the more parking we can have and Jennifer's done a fantastic job and it's like hurting cats. Um so that's my three minutes. Thank you.

Thanks. All right. So, um I'm going to make Yes. Come on up. That's you.

Hi, my name is Colin Cooper. I work at KBY toboat. Um, as part of the proposed plan, it's not quite hitting us yet, but will be shortly. Um, a lot of the parking that looks like you guys are trying to get rid of is oversized vehicles, industrial vehicles, all people that work those businesses. They don't really fit in the parking structure you guys have built. Um, yes, I do drive a 20 foot truck, but I have four kids and, you know, can't be retired yet. So just seeing some of that go away when I got to carry 60 pounds of gear to work is hard. So anyway, all right. Thank you.

Okay. What I I'm just going to make a suggestion. First of all, um I think if I could have more parking, it' be wonderful on and and accommodate the businesses, but we need to accommodate sidewalks and other things for safety and development for the restaurants and whatever else may be coming. So that's a contingency that I think that we need to think about. I like the plan that it is. I wish that we could have more parking. But with all that said, we've been invited to uh go to the port and have a discussion. And I think before we do make a decision tonight that we kind of go down there, talk to the port u and get an an idea of where things might be going and then uh we're talking one month. I'd like this come back and ratify this plan, whatever it may be. Well, we'll have an a better idea of what the port's going to do, I think. When are your meetings? The port commission meetings?

The third Thursday. The third Thursday. Thursday. Next Thursday. Okay. It's my birthday. We'll hope for a Yes. All right. Yeah. This coming Thursday. Next Thursday. Okay. All right. So, that's my suggestion. Sarah,

thanks. I think that's a good suggestion. I I just want to say that if we increase multimmodal transport, it's going to mean that less people are driving cars to access those businesses. And uh I I think this council knows that I am in favor of this development and I hear the concerns from business owners. Uh but I agree with councelor Matthews. The greatest cities and places I've ever visited have more multimotal transport than we currently have. I think it will increase tourism. I think it will increase foot traffic to those businesses and I think it will increase safety and it will increase new businesses wanting to come into our community. So, I'm in I'm in full favor of of uh the plan that you've proposed to talk with the port. Uh but I also think we need to continue forward momentum on this.

I think well I think everyone's kind of aligned that way but I think that we need just to get some more detail and ideas where we're at. So I t we've taken this long unfortunately it's taken this long. Uh so taking another month uh and to just kind of uh talk to people and have a feeling of what things might be would be the way to go. Is there is there any disagreement with that?

No, I I would like to say you said it took us a long time, Mayor Benetti, but remember this plan uh the initial plan started in 2016 and it's uh and then the the formalized plan was in 2022. It's 2025 now. That's not so bad for state government. So I feel like we have done what6 [laughter] for so I feel like we have done some good work. I'm not saying that we have we need to be reminded.

I just like to get this finalized anyway. So the counselors that are virtual are we all right with this or not? I am in favor of making sure everybody feels comfortable with this with the acknowledgement that there will be some compromise uh that will have to be made on both sides in order to find something that we can move forward with and uh I understand that and I'm just hoping that we can find that path forward where everybody feels like uh they've been heard and that things will be better than they are today. All right. So,

I agree with with that and I but I do want to just acknowledge that there have I mean there was a long process to get us here that included multiple opportunities for businesses to be part of the building of this plan. So, um yes, we can take another month, but this is this isn't new. This shouldn't be new to folks. Okay. So, that's what we'll do. And I want to I want to thank everyone for Forgive me. I mayor, go ahead.

That's that's fine. I I agree with um councelor Stevens, councelor Matthews, and I I suppose my point is this has been a long time and this has been discussed and I'm not sure what we're going to gain by moving it another month forward. Um but that being said, I'm willing to support the, you know, the majority and move that direction if if that's what we need to do. But I am in support of this and I'm ready to move forward with it. And I'm not I'm not disagreeing with that. We have two designs is what we have right now. I would like to know yes that's we but we were only discussing one issue tonight but to move that part forward

and we will be moving it forward I believe Troy I it's but I if we could save dollars and design and time taking a month to do it wouldn't it be prudent for us to do it in that fashion is what I'm talking about. Yes. And again, I will agree. I will move with the with the the majority of the group and we'll support that decision.

All right. Okay. Anyway, I want to thank everyone for attending. It was great to see the port come here. It's our turn to come there and and see what we can uh figure out here. And I want to remind anyone, I am more than willing to come down and talk about this and see if there's something that we need to address that we have forgotten. Heidi knows better than anyone that I'm willing to do that. And I am still I'll throw that out there at anyone. So I'm more than available to come down, talk to you, have coffee, whatever, take a walk. So anyway, thank you so much. All right, Mr. Mayor.

Yes. Uh I just before we uh close the public hearing on this um or the public comment spot, uh Jamie Faraday, who was accompanying me uh throughout the um meet and greet on Front Street when we were bringing this plan uh to everybody, he had pre-crafted uh a little response or a a statement that uh he was unable to share because he had to leave the meeting. Um and I'd like to just uh enter that into the record. Uh he says um um number one as we stand there exists more parking than ever in recent past and with the new with the new parking lot. Number two this area is crucial a crucial piece in the pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and has the distinct potential for improving the lack of safe and efficient efficient transit. Number three, it is used by cyclists and pedestrians, runners, walkers, sightseers, even though it can be challenging with a set of tracks in the roadway. And number four, talking with the businesses between Cedar and Fur other than Mrs. Sauce, who we didn't get to meet that day. Uh, this plan was met with overwhelming positive feedback. So, I just wanted to get that in there. He he asked me to share that.

All right. Thanks. All right. With that, we're going to move on to the city manager report. Anyway, again, thank you everyone for attending. Right. Thanks, Nicole.

Yes, thank you. Uh, so the first thing, we already talked about it a little bit tonight, but we have a screen that's down. It's actually a projector, which are fairly old and really difficult to get replacement parts. So, we are looking at uh different options in this room. Um, I don't know what that's going to look like, but we've gotten some quotes. So, just [clears throat] let you know, we're working on that. Uh, this Saturday, we have a couple of events to uh maybe some folks want to attend. OBAB again is going to start up their 2026 cleanups. They're actually going to be at the Milloma Marsh um this Saturday 1 to 3. And then also uh Senator Mkeley is going to be holding a town hall in North Bend at the community center at starting at 3. And that is all I was going to share with us tonight.

That's it. All right. Uh Stephanie,

uh I don't have too much to say. I just really appreciate the public coming out today. I appreciate seeing all the folks here tonight. Um and just real quick wanted to make a comment that um I grew up on the waterfront. I grew up watching the ships. I rode my bike on front from Front Street um before the history museum was there um all the way around the bay, but but spent most of my time on Front Street and the boardwalk before the boardwalk was there. And there were log trucks and there was industry and there were warehouses and there were all those sorts of things. That's how we got around when I was a kid because we didn't our parents were working. Um, so I I understand and appreciate the waterfront and the work. I I believe that they have that we have to be considerate uh of our working waterfront and um I would be interested in talking more with the folks who have businesses down there um and would make myself available. My phone number is published on the website. So, if you have anything that that I need to know, I would be happy to take that information. That's all I have.

Right. Miss uh I just want to thank the st the citizens um for coming out. I really want to commend the port. We put you uh in the hot seat a couple times. So, thank you. Appreciate that. And I appreciate uh Commissioner um Elise um helping us uh answer some of those questions as well. Um there are times that people think that we rubber stamp things and I think tonight's meeting is a perfect example that we don't and this is part of the process and we all come with different opinions and different perspectives and hopes that we make the best decision for this community. So I just really want to thank the council, the staff for all the work and I just really appreciate my fellow um counselors. Thanks. Thanks uh Carmen.

All right. Um I'll just uh jump right in. And I want to say uh thank you to the staff who's really done a ton of work. Uh that's evident by tonight's uh agenda. Uh from, you know, front street blue plan plans to code amendments. Uh staff is working tirelessly to make things better for this community. Whether that's, you know, through streamlining and making our uh application and permitting process more uh user friendly and uh easier to digest or uh helping us to design what our future home will look like and how we interact with it. And I just really am uh very grateful for the team that we have. Um it's clear to me that everybody's working uh at a high level to make this work as best they can. And then on a more personal note, as a business business owner in the uh waterfront area who receives um numerous deliveries through semis and does their own deliveries on a regular basis and carries lots of stuff into their business. Uh there are ways to make this work and and I and I'm in a parking constrained section of the waterfront. That being said, uh being on the waterfront as a business owner has been a dream of mine. It's been something I wanted to do since I started in my entrepreneurial interests. Uh bringing the waterfront to the public in a way that they can interact with it um on a more regular basis, feeling uh more included in this waterfront. Uh access has been a goal of mine uh through my business. Uh, as someone who grew up here as well, um, I don't feel like I

interacted with the bay as much as I would like. Uh, I was a part of, [clears throat]

uh, the Surf Rider Foundation. We started a community paddle called Stand Up for the Bay that just was basically to show the recreational opportunities that existed right out in front of our front door basically. And uh that has been something that I want to continue to uh highlight what our bay offers to us uh you know recreationally and just it's it's part of our our space our collective space and uh I I don't feel like I had access to that as much as I wanted as a young resident of Kuzbay and now that Kuzbay Village is here and is providing that opportunity It is honestly a dream come true. Uh looking at that abandoned lot for decades growing up and seeing this potential. Um seeing its potential. Uh it was it was uh hard to hard to look at it knowing I didn't have a way to make it better. And then along comes a developer like Mr. Drobot and Daniel Graham and they bring a vision um into fruition and I was lucky enough to be a part of that and I got to say that interacting on the bayfront and inviting the public into these spaces although mine is very public for uh facing has been uh an extreme uh uh something I've been extremely grateful for and uh I really hope that uh as a community, we find ways to include the public in the water. Uh our waterway is the the gem of our downtown, if you will. And uh I I really hope that uh we are equitable in the ways we allow that um access to be obtained. And so uh I I

really appreciate people trying to think outside the box um with how that's going to look. Uh I I like people being able to identify what will be the hurdles so that we can find ways to address those hurdles and maybe make them uh less of a hurdle. Maybe it's something there's always a creative way to find um a path forward. And I I appreciate everybody coming in today to give their testimony as to what parts of this plan are not going to work for them, how uh it will affect their businesses, and let's find a way forward if we can. So that's all I have. Thank you.

Thanks, Troy. Uh I have no comments tonight. Thank you. Sarah Sarah had to leave. Oh, she did.

All right. So anyway, my comments are pretty simple. I'm going to make them short. Anyway, I just want to wish everyone a happy new year. Uh I look for my mayor's message with last year. I just think it's important to realize what we've accomplished in the city. Uh I think it's mindboggling when we put it together how many millions of dollars in economic development we've done. We don't go out there and talk about it all the time, but when you add it up at the end of the day or at the end of the year, I should say, it's been really successful. and we couldn't have done it without the staff and the volunteers and this council that I've been so fortunate to work with. So, thank you very much. Look forward to a good year for all of us. Good evening.

And we have a urban renewal meeting and so I'll adjourn this meeting and uh Stephanie will run the urban renewal. Thank you. Yes, we do that uh readily in the downtown for sure. We've actually the agency has dedicated annually dollars towards sidewalk improvement. So that is something that the agency could decide to do in a future year's budget. Okay. Thank you.

I just had a question for Nicole, if I may. I I think um if uh uh Mr. Lundy does decide to take up your offer, I would remind him that the boat building center that I think he owns uh also received urban renewal dollars. And the reason that it is the building today uh is because of the dollars that the city invested in it. A perfect example of uh putting dollars into a business to provide value and I'm sure he appreciates that beautiful building he owns

on the waterfront. Uh, I'll make a motion to uh approve the improvement grant request of $150,000 of eligible expenses subject to submitt of any required permits uh flood plane and structural. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second to approve the improvement grant request of $150,000 of eligible expenses for 1200 Newark Avenue. Uh any any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I I I.

All opposed. The motion carries. And that is all we have to come before this body. So I will adjourn the meeting. Thank you everyone. Good night. We